RESPONSE TO NYTIMES ARTICLE
Read the full response, here.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following is astatement from Alan Rosenbloom, President of the Alliance for QualityNursing Home Care, in reaction to the Sunday, Sept 23, New York Times storyentitled, “At Many Homes, More Profit and Less Nursing:” “The nursing home data analyzed by the New York Times, and noted in thereporting itself, examines a very narrow segment of the nation’s long termcare ownership category, and is far from representative of the total longterm care quality picture in America’s nursing homes – which is improvingoverall. As the article itself notes, the Times analysis concerns less than10% of all nursing homes in America, and many of the problems notedinvolved only 5% of all homes. The news article does, however, raise important issues about the needto sustain for the long term the many successful government andprofession-wide quality improvement initiatives now underway — and ourprofession will continue to advocate the vital need to assess patientoutcome data and patient and family satisfaction surveys, which are highlyrelevant to the overall quality equation. Further, we concur with theGovernment Accountability Office (GAO), the Department of Health and HumanServices (HHS) and other independent sources finding that while there havebeen specific, measurable quality improvements in several importantclinical areas, there is still far more to do. The very data analyzed by the New York Times is representative of thelong term care profession’s demonstrated commitment to public datadisclosure, and making more information available for consumers to considerand evaluate as a means of assessing facility quality. This is correctlybringing about more accountability, and spurring increased competitionamong facilities. This is beneficial to every consumer, the regulatoryauthorities, federal and state lawmakers, and providers themselves. Ourprofession has demonstrated the leadership expected and required, and willcontinue to do so.
Please see my highlighted sections —- are public disclsoures optional? NO. but I agree – far more to do!